Abrams: Star Trek Not Traditional Prequel February 5, 2008
by Anthony Pascale , Filed under: Abrams, Star Trek (2009 film) , trackback
When JJ Abrams comes to TrekMovie.com for a live chat or speaks at some tech conference, he shows off his geek cred. But, of course his plan for the new Star Trek is to appeal to everyone so he has to shed that when he talks to the ‘norms.’ Which is exactly what you can see with some quotes buried in one of those ‘Movies to look forward to in 2008′ previews over at USA Today where Abrams is quoted saying…
I was not an avid Star Trek fan, I want this to appeal to people who never saw Star Trek or think its days are over.
POTENTIAL
SPOILER
BELOW
The director also explained to the USA TODAY how his new Star Trek will not be like other recent prequels:
It won’t suffer from the problem that traditional prequels suffer from: that you know all the characters will live.
TREKMOVIE SNEAK PEEK
could this be what Abrams is referring to?
More at USA Today
Thanks to Etha for the link
Comments»
This is PROOF that this movie is not loyal to canon!
He’s dead already!!!!
The no-win scenario just got a little more complicated.
Either someone dies in ther alternate timeline or they are killing off old Spock, which I would find really bad.
Scotty will be replaced with Welshy (Futurama episode)
#4 Yeah, I agree.
It seems that old Spock will die. Kirk had to die in Generations to pass on the torch. Now it seems that old Spock will die to pass on the legacy to the new crew.
Yeah, we won’t know all the characters will live. Anyone could die… Captain Kirk, Spock, McCoy, Scotty, Uhura, Sulu, Checkov or even Ensign Ricky! I guess we will have to wait and see which of these survive and which don’t. ;-)
Now I am going to go to bed and set my alarm for 11:00, Dec 24…. thats sure to work.
Let’s wait and see. He won’t kill off any regular character without bringing him/her back.
#5. WEEEEEELSHEEEEEeeeeeeee!!!!
This movie already butchered set design canon and now it seems that canon history will be violated!
Im trying very hard not to read the spoilers !!!
I strongly urge all Trek fans to stop reading Spoilers!
This movie is going to Rock,, I cant wait to see this!
Excellent. This movie will break new ground afterall.
This film will be fatal.
Section 31 warning for spamming
This is great to hear. with an alternate timeline and a liberal reading of canon this is gonna be fantastic !
Kirk dead at the end of the movie? Sulu lost the cold vacuum of space? Scotty dead from overconsumption of french fries? this could be a 3 part series just like II, III, IV.
awesome.
Note that Abrams said the problem with prequels was that everybody KNOWS nobody can die, NOT that nobody does die.
Nothing in his comment suggests he’s killing anybody off. Just that he’s introduced a scenario knows he *could* kill somebody off. The very fact that the movie has time travel from the future establishes that.
@#10
Enterprise already butchered set design canon. Also, for people who freak out about that stuff, have you noticed that there’s no one cosistent look for the 1701-A across three movies? You can say “it was a refit” all you want, but that’s not canonical either.
Just let the man make his movie and we’ll judge it on Christmas.
perhaps he’s just talking about some well known red-shirted ensigns. would be canon.
10. Section 31
breath, man.
He is not killing anyone alive in TOS.
Sometimes it seems as if you actually wanted the movie to break canon so you could attack it.
Captain April, don your red tunic and take this other noname ship to go after that Klingon/Romulan attacker thingy. Make sure Pike doesn’t get hurt or anything also. Take a few of Pike’s guys from the Talos run, they’d be good to help.
No, no one will die, just get so mamed that they can only beep…. ;-)
He actually called it a _prequel_… is there still hope it won’t *really* be a reimagining, but a “hi-fidelity” prequel? Of course for it to be a prequel, it can’t violate what comes after or else it is no longer a prequel.
So what does he mean with this looming axe over our intrepid heroes?
It’s going to change everything isn’t it?
Abrams isn’t a trekkie or a trekker, so simple as this will just be Star Trek’s dumbing down and mainstreaming, which probably means just a few less Trek-esq pieces of dialogue and a hell of a lot more blowing stuff up and actual human relations bits.
This is an attempt to make Trek cool, and for the main part it’s working, people are getting interested in the hype, the trailer isn’t what you would expect from Star Trek and the Enterprise has been changed to make it look more realistic.
Thing is, if you were a fan of Trek before, it’s probably not going to appeal as much. I mean the purists were always going to be mad about this, but they do have a slight point.
Ok, it would be unfair to claim that JJ Abrams is taking this franchise (a horrible word for Star Trek that is) just to make money and try and claim status as ‘the guy who saved trek’, but at the same time you must realise he was never going to leave alot the same no matter what he promised.
End of the day if your pitching Trek to a mainstream, hard to occupy audience, then you have to loose things which are essentially what Trek is about. The ethic of humans working toward something greater and better is still there, but the feeling of Trek, that buzz of it will not be there in the film if it looses some of the lingo and the general Trek themes.
The film could be epic, I know I will go and see it, as I am a self confessed Trek lover. But I know at the end of the day this isn’t going to be a ‘real’ Star Trek. It’s a shiny version. One to try and rebirth something which many seem to think has become old and tired.
But maybe older trek just isn’t getting a chance? I don’t know.
I don’t know whether I’m happy or sad about this movie. I know Nemesis sucked gigantic arse, but if what Abrams is making gets any more complicated, or is a total retcon, there will be that vain of sadness in watching the film.
Although the canon thing was ALWAYS going to be difficult. I don’t reckon there is a director out there who can cope with trek canon lol.
And in response to Section 31’s anger, I’m not thrilled about some of the stuff I’ve heard mate, but it’s quite obvious they won’t kill anyone who’s in the main cast, because that would just plain not make sense. Chillax. Stop being overly hostile and wait till it comes out. I’m voicing concerns, but not totally poo pooing it!
Although, New Voyages episode ‘To Serve All My Days’ end is worth mentioning….does anyone want to explain how that fits in lol because it threw me!
*Not mentioning how it ends so I don’t ruin it for any potential New Voyages viewers*
#1 “This is PROOF that this movie is not loyal to canon!”
Yes, of course it is.
How did you reach that conclusion with two one-line quotes?
I don’t care if this movie breaks canon. As long as it’s good, and fun, I’ll love it. Transformers rocked my world, and I’m hoping for that feeling again with Star Trek.
What if someone important is killed? Chechov, Uhura, Scotty?? We’ve never seen animportant death in “the Past” before because it would effect the future from existing shows and movies piont of view.
It couls so easily have happenned in “Yesterdays Enterprise”. If for what ever reason Guinan hadn’t convinced Picard to act, there would have been an entire life experience and altered universe to contend with. If Picard ahd not sent the Enterprise B back there would suddenly have been an entire series of stories to tell about the Klingon war.
What if some one is killed at the end on the new movie by someone from the future? Then time as we know it will have been altered. Hence new existance, new series but not the same mission. Yet at some time down the track, all could be reset if a Guinan type character says “This is not the way it was meant to be”
We’ve never seen a time paradox from the pasts view point before. There could be several movies of “lets go thatta way” instead of the way it was in the original series only to be reset at some piont in the future when “story telling” decides it’s necessary. In the mean time we enjoy what could have been and what could become the “Search for the Real time line”. Canon is wiped but alive at the same time.
I really love Trek.com. It’s the only place I would ever dream and speculate like this.
Sorry Anthony..I meant TrekMovie.com at the end and sorry for spelling mistakes..didn’t run the spell checker this time
Spock!!! My first thought was that they’re killing off old Spock too, which would make me very sad. :( I could sort of see it though, since we’ve seen Kirk die and don’t know how Spock dies. Still, it would be too sad!
#1
#10
Section 31 - take your canon and shove it up your arse.
Even if I cared about canon, which I don’t, there are several ways that major characters could be killed which don’t violate “my preciousssss…” - uh, I mean canon.
a. Old Spock could be killed.
b. It could show the death of one of the major characters in the lives of young Kirk or Spock; someone who never appeared in TOS.
c. Some or all of the film could occur in the mirror universe or some other alternate universe. If you know how to read, take out your canon bible and read about: Yesterday’s Enterprise, Parallels, Mirror Mirror, etc, etc. All canon, all involving deaths and ressurections that DID NOT happen in the TOS universe.
Get a life.
#22
-.. but it’s quite obvious they won’t kill anyone who’s in the main cast, because that would just plain not make sense. -
You’re obviously right as regards young Spock; killing him would make no sense as we already know that old Spock is still alive in the TNG timeline, but why would killing old Spock at the end of the movie make no sense?
And if Abrams was only referring to old Kirk remaining dead, he already suggested that with his most recent comments and his current comment would not have been an interesting tidbit, a statement as to his perception of the film’s approach, but a redundancy. As I understand it, *that* would just plain not make sense.
#25: C, it was the C.
#25
Excellent points. A mirror-universe seen from the past would be good. One of the few good eps from Enterprise was there mirror universe 2-parter. The new movie could be a similar idea - show a “what if” scenario of an alternate universe that would happen if Kirk were killed, and then have future Spock somehow set it right.
Section 31 - the official films (like this one) ESTABLISH canon, dummy. They can do whatever they want and then it becomes canon.
I know what he’s talking about. I mean, in a parallel universe different things can happen and nobody is safe.
If it is alternate time lines interacting with other alternate timelines then you can kill Kirk and co. lots of times… just as long as he survies in “our” timeline,. We already have the mirror universe, so why not others too.
Thinking about it, the new series of Doctor Who has done a similar thing in some cases, not being a reboot it did go down the route with some classic enemies of re-telling a slightly different origins story in a mirror universe. That way you preserve the official canon and get to reboot things at the same time.
JJ Abrams raped my childhood!! Hang on, I’m 32 and that was Star wars. Ooops, sorry.
“I was not an avid Star Trek fan, I want this to appeal to people who never saw Star Trek or think its days are over.”
For this to be true the plot doesn’t have to be too complicated. IMO, time travel and alternate timelines are matter for Trek geeks. Casual people would have a lot of trouble understanding such intricate events, deeply tied to Trek lore. For this reason I think that we cannot say for sure that timeline messing is involved.
“It won’t suffer from the problem that traditional prequels suffer from: that you know all the characters will live.”
Just so long as they don’t go killing off Spock again. >:(
Old Spock will not die but who knows maybe young Spock….
;-)
The adventure continues…
#30madcynic
I stand corrected. Most definately C
Abrams is pretty much giving CPR to Star Trek and the purists are whinging because if it lives it won’t be wearing the same clothes.
Im glad Abrams is going in this direction with a liberal reading of canon. IMO by the end of the film it will be a Star Trek alternate timeline. For goodness sake its only television and just because its an alternate timeline it doesn’t mean all the stuff in the ‘ordinary’ timeline didn’t happen, im betting their writing the film on the assumption that the many worlds interpretation of physics is true, in which case as soon as the timeline changes it will have branched off into an alternate universe.
all this speculation is making me very nervous…………..
so someone dies he also spoke of different time lines so i assume kirk dies and we see the universe without kirks influence !!
Okay, it finally all makes sense. I’ve always predicted something like that but I guess this means PROOF now:
1. As CBS TV and Paramount Pictures have split the Trek copyright, they desperately need TWO Trek timelines! CBS will explore the future of the old timeline with DTV releases and TV productions, while Paramount is going to present us all new blockbuster movies in this new, undetermined timeline.
2. Nero and Old Spock are just means to an end, i.e. establishing the new timeline. That’s why Nero’s role is little more than a cameo. Nero is not your average villain planing to alter the timeline by timetravel. Everything is just an accident! An experiment went wrong, setting developments in motion that DO change significant aspects of THIS NEW Trek universe, e.g. technology (ship design!), politics (destriction of Vulcan) and even characters (young Spock mind melding etc)…
3. While old viewers will be able to relate the new timeline with the original chronology trough Old Spock, new viewers won’t have to bother with any of that. They can enjoy the new Trek as a completely independent incarnation, like Raimi’s Spider-Man movies being independent from the comic books…You don’t need to read the comics to understand those movies but you may enjoy certain details a little more if you know your comic books…
4. In case of success, this new timeline will recombine things in a completely different way. We may see Kirk fighting the Borg or even discovering the Bajoran wormhole and the Dominion and none of this will hurt continuity since it already is a completely different reality! And that is absolutely brilliant…
As long as the original timeline won’t cease to exist (and how could it, given IDIC), I’m fine with all of this…it makes a lot of sense…
Spock has to live … please.
I won’t survive another dead Spock - please NO!!!!!!!!
35. RE: Star Wars
At least JJ didn’t destroy what he himself created and was rightly proud of. :-P
Paramount handed the reigns to JJ for a reason. If he wants to kill characters, by golly, he has a right to. Just like some fans ignore “Enterprise”, just ignore the movie if you’re going to be upset about it. People are way too quick to judge.
If the movie is good, I’m going to enjoy it. If it creates a new continuity, that’s fine with me. I’ve made my peace.
How about….
Kirk does die at the end of this -
Old Spock fails, lost in interminable timelines and he can’t get back home
…..and his younger Sylar self is now… Captain of the Enterprise!!!
There must be an evil laugh somewhere…
The 11 months wait is excruciating. I don’t know if I can hold on for much longer… ;) I might literally explode from anticipation around summer… I’ll let you guys know if I survive. :)
I don’t think I’ve been as hyped about a movie like this in my entire life. JJ better deliver after lifting my expectations so much, I don’t know what I will do if I don’t like the movie!!!
My conclusion: old Spock will die and Shatner will not appear in Star Trek ever. Live long and prosper to new cast.
-So we will never see an old KIRK again..we know that thing already.. : )
Time will tell. There are always possibilities.
I wonder how long it will be before old Stanky gets over the shock of THIS announcement! Can’t imagine that he won’t weigh in soon!
Here’s what I think.
In this movie Old Spock will die during some event in which the whole timeline is changed forever creating a brand new timeline.
This will then allow this new version of Star Trek to have totally new adventures not violating canon as we will now be in an alternative timeline.
We could even go on the five year mission all over again as it will all be new and in an alternate timeline that we will now be following. And as all of their futures are now unsure and no longer set in stone we can no longer assume that the main characters are safe or when they die (for instance Kirk may not now die the way he died in the original timeline).
Who knows in twenty or thirty years time this means that we may even get a new version of TNG.
If I’m right then Abrams and his writers are geniuses as they will be able to do whatever they want after this movie in the Star Trek universe whilst at the same time being able to say that all of the original canon will still exist in the original alternate timeline and is safe and will remain untouched.
Not only that they will have ensured the continuation of the franchise for a brand new generation.
With sci-fi you can have your cake and eat it.
YAY! :-D this film sounds so cool.
This means we could see new and bigger versions of the TV episodes, since this is a new timeline, but where many of the same things happen.
Imagine a movie version of The Doomsday Machine!
Hey, a cameo for me, hahahaha! ;-)
Another round of meaningless information taken to be more than what it is. These people involved in production talk and they don’t say anything, but there are plenty of other people willing to put meaning behind the statements.
this must be the movie where spock really dies…
#6 ha ha! welshy was da man!
#53 that would rock… commodore decker was great, that ep would make a great feature
10: Using exact replicas of any TOS sets would be completely impossible unless the movie was going to be a comedy. What little we’ve seen of the sets suggests a modern interpretation of the original Jefferies designs. Note the shape of the hallway sections. In fact, there’s nothing in them which couldn’t indicate that the sets as they appeared in TOS were actually an upgraded refit which replaced what we’ll see in the movie… if you want to be a canon purist.
16: Exactly. The instant Spock shows up in the past, the entire universe from that point on becomes flexible. In “real” time travel, the shockwaves of change would make things more and more unrecognizable the farther we go into the future. Even if Picard’s parents decide to conceive on the same day, a different… cell… might fertilize the egg, etc. In Star Trek, we’ve seen this shockwave to be relatively weak, so this doesn’t mean that everything we’ve seen take place is now invalid. What it does mean is that the writers are now free to make little changes in the interest of whatever is creative and cool. It also means that there’s an opportunity for the writers to explore the cost and consequences of time travel. The resistance of the fans will be the force which prevents them from straying too far. Geordi won’t be replaced by a sighted woman named Gia, Beverly won’t give Picard medical hair restoration and the Allies won’t lose the Dominion War. Probably.
Mirror Universe: Please, no. It’s a fine playground for episodic Star Trek, but it’s too silly for film. The notion that hundreds of years of history can be radically altered and that all of the same people will still be born and found in roughly the same location as their regular universe counterparts can’t be taken seriously. It was a vehicle for talking about opposing tyranny, and other shows had a little bit of fun with it here and there, but it should be mostly avoided IMO.
#1 -
Since when has Star Trek followed its own cannon? Enterprise had many cannon violations!
For all of you whining about this ruining canon, think about it. This may be the perfect way to bring back The Shat for future movies. If the timeline is altered, he may never die in Generations. (Of course, this would create a temporal paradox that could destroy the universe but, hey, you pays your money, you takes your chances)
Yah, in the new timeline everyone walks around in Mirror Universe clothing, BUT everyone is good.
All the Fashion Goodies of the Mirror Universe without the Agony Booth. Zoe wears killer boots as Uhura.
Downside? Old Spock gets killed off in a final “Fistful of Dollars” battle with Nero for the hand of the jilted Romulan Commander from “The Enterprise Incident”. But Nimoy probably wants to check out and get one last paycheck on the way out the door.
Meanwhile, in the REAL Mirror Universe, everyone wears uniforms that looks like they work at a Motel Six but they still commit genocide on a planetary scale. Uhura looks like the maid.
I am totally cool with it as long as they do not introduce a new Engineer named Jar Jar………………”Mesa givin’ all she can handles Captain, sir”
Spock cannot die because Vulcans are immortal, duh.
Yea yea… someone dies… OR…. someone that was dead LIVES!!!
*Runs for the hills*
To be honest…..
I’m sick and tired of reading these effin’ crybaby purists…..
Example:
No. 10: “This movie already butchered set design canon and now it seems that canon history will be violated!”
Some other’s I’ve seen in the past (in exaggerated form):
“I’m so pissed Abrams did make to Enterprise look EXACTLY like the 1966 version!”
“I can’t believe the bridge isn’t going to look EXACTLY like the original!”
And my all-time favorite:
“HE’S RAPING MY CHILDHOOD!”
What is canon and who wrote it? Seems to me the show was put together in concept and characters, and like all other television show productions, was written one episode at a time by writers trying to take a concept and put it into reality. There was no written biography of Kirk, Spock, or any other character. There was no official history of the United Federation of Planets, or Starfleet, or much less Earth from 1968 on… aside from a few references here and there (ala Khan). They had to build it from scratch.
And lest we forget, the writers and original creator(s) of Star Trek broke from canon themselves. Star Trek IV is a perfect example. According to STARTREK.com, Khan Noonien Singh was “a genetically-bred “superman” of Earth’s India in the late 20th century.” In addition, the site goes on to say, “Rising to power among others of his kind, his ambition helped further the Eugenics Wars, which involved much of Earth’s Third World. Finally facing defeat, he and dozens of followers escaped in the S.S. Botany Bay, a DY-100 vessel modified as a sleeper ship.” It seems to me that there would have been something, somewhere, referencing this, or a Eugenics War, or even political strife leading up to it, in the story of Star Trek IV… instead we got, “there be whales here!”
Oh, and perhaps we can see holes in story lines. Let’s look at one of the most revered Star Trek films in existence — Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan. Ceti Alpha VI explodes, altering the orbit of Khan’s planet, Ceti Alpha V. Wouldn’t it stand to reason that the explorers and devout scientists of Starfleet and the UFP would have been curious about the plight of a planet, namely one that was known capable of supporting life? Perhaps a USS Grissom-esque science vessel (STIII) would be sent to examine it. Would Kirk not have reported the “Space Seed” incident to his superiors right after he dropped them off, and would they have not, at some point, sent a ship to “check on our progress” as Admiral Kirk seemingly failed to do?
Lets move on to Star Trek: Generations. The Whoopi Goldberg character ‘Guinan’ is one of the refugees rescued from the derelict ships trapped in the Nexus in the beginning of the film. Would not have someone from Starfleet or the UFP questioned these refugees as to where they came from, and how their planet was destroyed? Would not the name “Borg” have been referenced earlier in TNG? Why the sudden surprise of their discovery? Oh, and lest we forget the Borg were in an episode of Enterprise. Is Starfleets’ historical, operational, and medical database that corrupted that large chunks of it’s own data is lost… and it’s members just generally forgot MAJOR scientific finds?
Are you really concerned whether the Enterprise doesn’t “fit canon?” Seriously……
Ladies and gentlemen… we don’t HAVE an official Star Trek right now, other than what’s rerun in syndication. The last series, aside from a few episodes, story concepts and good intentions, was largely a failure to fans AND to Paramount. Viewership had decreased in folds since the end of TNG, regardless of how good DS9 actually was. Rick Berman, though I’m sure it wasn’t his conscious intent, drove the franchise into the ground, both on television and in film. And yes, it is a franchise, for those who scoff at that word. Perhaps we can let J.J. Abrams do his job which he obviously has a talent for (see: Lost, MI:III, and Cloverfield). And lets not forget, at the end of the day, Star Trek is a part of the entertainment business — the watch word being ‘BUSINESS.’ It’s primary function is to “put asses in the seats” to collect a profit. By all rights, J.J. Abrams could turn to Enterprise into the Queen Elizabeth, make a profit on the release of the film, and be quite established in the studios as a money-making filmmaker. I think we owe him a debt of gratitude for considering the woes, concerns and questions of the fans at all… never mind the fact that HE’S PUTTING STAR TREK BACK ON THE MAP!!!
I am thrilled at what I’ve seen and read…. I cannot wait to see this film! I haven’t felt this optimistic about seeing Star Trek since I was a little kid.
oh and besides… Nero is going to die (assumably) and what about Captain Archer? he died after the Enterprise launch (apparently)
*Turn around and runs again*
#59
With all due respect, I love Shatner but he’s old and…um…large. For how many more movies can you pencil him in?
Kirk dies in minute 82. Don’t ask me how I know…
Okay, so J.J.’s adding some cylons, whadda gonna do?
The Family Guy clips is funny… but why is Kirk spazzing out like that? Are they trying to insinuate that Shatner overacted?
And if so, where would they come up with such a stupid idea? The Shat is just bigger than life and some can’t handle it. :)
I know someone is going to jump me for saying this but - it would make sense to me for Old Spock to die, from what very little I know of the movie, and especially if they plan on making more films with this new crew. He’s not immortal, he has to die sometime, and that would be a way of passing the torch to the new cast.
As long as he got a better send off than Kirk did in Generations, I think I’d be cool with that.
Once Nero jacks with the timeline, all bets are off. But wouldn’t it be cool that after all is said and done, the crew is all in their classic TOS uniforms, Kirk gets his first command of the 01, and music swells, the lights go up…we step on popcorn and sticky floors…grab our iphones and start blogging before we even get to the car….
IDIC
Why does the evil guy always have to die?
Star Trek 1: V’Ger - dead. Ok, he “evolved”, but he was gone.
Star Trek 2: Khan - dead.
Star Trek 3: Kruge - dead.
Star Trek 4: There was no evil guy.
Star Trek 5: “God” - dead.
Star Trek 6: Chang - dead.
Star Trek 7: The Duras Sisters and Soran - dead.
Star Trek 8: The Borg (Queen) - dead.
Star Trek 9: Ru’afo - dead.
Star Trek 10: Shinzon - dead.
I would love to see a Star Trek movie in which the evil guy wouldn’t have to die at the end…
And when I look at this list… There was only one female antagonist in ten movies? Speak about discrimination ;)
re:70
Yes. I think Nimoy agreed to do a one of.
re:72
Maybe Nero is a pre-op “female.” Now, that would be something to draw out the ire of ST fandom!
70. RE: Death of Spock?
I think that Spock is going to fall down the bottomless pit on the Enterprise, just like that viceroy in Nemesis.
As long as he doesn’t grasp onto the ledge and say “Fly, you fools”. Then we’d expect yet another resurrection.
“I am Spock The White.”
I’m all for alternative timelines, “mirror” universes, jumping back and forth in time, and looking at the established ST universe from a rather different angle, as IMO this would be the only way to make this movie work.
And 40 years of great Star Trek provide the basis for taking pleasure in speculating over the new film’s approach, as any new gimmick will just add a chapter and may be fun to watch, but will never be able to replace or destroy the fundamental image we were given by TOS.
#75 LMFAO!
#43 - “As long as the original timeline won’t cease to exist (and how could it, given IDIC), I’m fine with all of this…it makes a lot of sense… ”
Well, no matter what happens in the film, the original timeline won’t cease to exist, in theory (and even in practice to a certain degree, since we’re told that Spock starts there at the film’s beginning).
But…
In real-life practice, if the net result is to create this new alternate timeline, all future Trek productions will be set in the “new continuum”, and even the licensed material will be increasingly influenced by same (and there’s pretty much no way it wouldn’t be, given the nature of the beast here), then in effect the original timeline ceases to exist except in the minds and hearts of folks who care about the Trekverse of the first 4 decades.
And if that happens, if the studio’s going to just walk away from 40+ years of storytelling, almost all within a single general continuity, it will be a very sad day, irrelevant of how good or bad the film itself might turn out to be.
#59 - “For all of you whining about this ruining canon, think about it. This may be the perfect way to bring back The Shat for future movies. ”
Not worth it. (Sorry, Bill, if you’re reading!)
#64-”Are you really concerned whether the Enterprise doesn’t ‘fit canon?’ Seriously……”
Nope, ’cause it fit just fine. ;)
#71 Perfect. I can’t think of a better end to the movie than this. What a great image.
#76 For once we agree.
Couldn’t old Spock, before he dies, grab the young Spock and dump his Katra hard drive via mind meld. Now young Spock approaches all of the new adventures with old Spock’s experience and perspective - but no one else on the enterprise knows he is future-aware.
I know - it’s bullshit - but hey, I’m trying here.
Oh, really, who gives a Tribble’s ass if the movie is loyal to canon or not? Is that fact that the Enterprise is built on Earth (horror of horrors) REALLY going to prevent Star Trek from being a good movie? In my experience, the majority of Trekkies are smart, curious people, but reading remarks from obsessive Trekkies remind me of fundamentalist Christians quibbling over which version of the Bible is ‘true.’
It was steadfast, slavish adherence to canon that completely ground Trek to a halt in the first place (I tip my hat to you, Rick Berman). Hopefully, JJ Abrams will retain the spirit of what we all love about Trek while giving us something fresh and fun (which is what made the original Trek, warts and all, so appealing), and it looks like so far he has- that teaser gave me goosebumps too. But, for IDIC’s sake, please remember: it’s not a holy text, it’s not a religion, just a movie.
This one’s the last straw. I give up. Frankly, I’m tired of all the “trust me” and “not your daddy’s trek” and the enthusiastically delivered comments that really don’t reveal anything that come from the production team. The fan base is running around trying to pick flysh*t out of pepper based on what? A 30 second trailer that really doesn’t reveal jack? Some amorphous comments from “insiders”?
There was a time (pre-internet days, for all readers under 15), when fans had to seek out information about new movies from obscure print sources. Anyone out there remember fanzines, or Jim Steranko’s “Mediascene” or other like publications produced by folks who clearly loved the genres upon which they were reporting? Because of that, the way in which movies were released and promoted was much different (for the better, IMHO).
Creative types actually seemed to care about attracting a passionate fan base by releasing meaningful information rather than running around saying “trust us - we make good movie”. For example, several months prior to the release of “Star Wars” (and no I ain’t doing the renumbered chapters foolishness), Lucas had not only released a lot of Ralph McQuarrie’s pre-production art but a complete novelization of the movie.
It is sounding almost as though this film will be one for the “it blowed up real good” crowd than for those who found ST more challenging (and thus, more entertaining) over the years because it seemed to resist pandering to the lowest common denominator. If this is the creative team’s idea of “viral marketing”, it sure has backfired for me. After a brief period of cautious optimism, these recent comments have driven me to a point where I could care less about what’s up with this new film.
#80-
Just might actually happen. Hope NOT.
Personally, I think old Spock is done- permanently.
why does everyone at the helm of the Star Trek franchise think it’s cool to kill off all our favourite characters? Why is this necessary? It seriously bothers me. The first examples that come to mind are Trip and Data. Their deaths did not contribute to the quality of Nemesis or the Enterprise Finale, and the stories certainly could’ve been told without these deaths. Especially Kirk! That whole movie could’ve been done without the TOS cast. Berman & company really dropped the ball on that one, and Shatner never should’ve signed on, especially if Nimoy refused to sign on. A strange twist of fate that Nimoy refused to participate with Generations, and now Shatner can’t get into XI.
Anyway, my point here is that killing off beloved characters doesn’t always make for a great episode or movie.
Folks, we have to grasp the fact that the only way we’re going to see new Trek based on the TOS is like this: starting new with the same characters.
Same of different timeline., it’s all double-talk to justify it to the hardcore canonites…. but the reality is, we’re getting new TOS adventures.
I’ll take what I can get.
Very interesting comments from the above comments. I have been thinking about some of what this film has to be myself. I know in the end it is all about a business and making money. Let us get real Paramount is not going to want a STAR TREK film to have low attendance when it comes out, so it must appeal to a huge section of the population. Here is where I am torn. Myself who loves the original STAR TREK and to a degree most of the spin off, wants this film to really have as much of the look and feel of the original show that is possible. But I know some elements have to be changed to bring in others. But the irony is the original most of been good enough as it was to survive and have the interest up to this present film. Myself I would love a CAGE type Enterprise with that era uniform/equipment made with good material and slightly updated. Who knows we haven’t seen anything yet to know what we are getting. Of course part of me who in truth always wanted a reboot of the whole thing so they could go off and not worry about trying to match or fit in with the original series. So there is a part of me that will either enjoy how they pull off what they do or be disappointed. Still it is just a film to me and real life is more important. ;)
Myself I find it a touch ironic that to want as much of a original series looking film makes it seem sort of alternative or out of the mainstream. The original STAR TREK was like any series a money making venture first that would be taking a few chances with story and characters, but with network execs trying to make it more mainstream. So here we are 40 years later taking that STAR TREK and attempting to mainstream it more.;) Funny in some respects, but very realistic in the end. Since my college years where I met others that opened me up to other music, films, comics, etc. beyond what was top selling, top 40, etc. I have usually in many cases not agreed with much popular culture stuff. Not all of it as I am amazed there are a few top selling songs, films, shows, etc. I may well enjoy. I just hope to make this STAR TREK film more mainstream they don’t dumb it down and rip out all of the elements that made it interesting. I am not a purist and enjoy some revisions. Hell I love the new BATTLESTAR GALACTICA remake. Of course remember the original show was only a season so there was not much to get so attached to. Will STAR TREK the story has continued 40 years. Oh yeah one more thing please do not put any lame top 40 hip hop rap in the soundtrack.;) Sorry I know too many people that like that stuff and see too many films that have it in the sound tracks. That would be my breaking point with this film. Still I do love some rap and hip hop just not the mainstream crap. Hmmm not sure why I mentioned that…;)
I read 51. Stephen from Scotland post and loved his idea of what could happen to make it a new series being born out of the old! It starts with the original canon and branches out. The other series into films still exists in one way but we follow this branch started by JJ ABRAMS. To me that would be cool. I do love that Nimoy who was with STAR TREK at the very beginning is here again. I almost see him as the actor and character as a comfort/father figure seeing off the new offspring. This new TREK. Of course others say it is passing the baton. Gee I have typed too much. ;) I just felt inspired reading the other comments to through in my 2 cents. I do look forward to this film and I know I will definitely have some opinion of it. Here is hope for a good one.;)
Oh yeah one more thing 64. AnAvidFan also makes some good points about continuity with the overall STAR TREK series with films included. In the end I hope first for good story with acting to pull you in, and at least some of the classic look of STAR TREK. There now I have said enough.
#81-”Oh, really, who gives a Tribble’s ass if the movie is loyal to canon or not?”
Me. :)
“Is that fact that the Enterprise is built on Earth (horror of horrors) REALLY going to prevent Star Trek from being a good movie?”
Nope, but then it was never established how the Enterprise was constructed, so it’s an open question.
Equally, some flexibility with visual portrayal really is pretty much a necessity, and I think that most folks probably believe that and are will to offer that sort of flexibility.
“It was steadfast, slavish adherence to canon that completely ground Trek to a halt in the first place (I tip my hat to you, Rick Berman).”
I completely disagree with this. I think it was uninspired storytelling and a lack of engaging characters that did that, far more than anything having to do with staying in continuity.
“Hopefully, JJ Abrams will retain the spirit of what we all love about Trek while giving us something fresh and fun (which is what made the original Trek, warts and all, so appealing), and it looks like so far he has- that teaser gave me goosebumps too.”
With this I will agree, but I don’t consider “fresh and fun” to be mutually exclusive from remaining in basic continuity with what’s come before. And I have to admit to being completely unable to comprehend the suggestion that it would be.
“But, for IDIC’s sake, please remember: it’s not a holy text, it’s not a religion, just a movie.”
And if the movie would stand completely on its own and not be an influence on how Paramount and its licensees handle Trek moving forward, it’d be one thing. But we know that isn’t the case, and thus it carries with it a certain level of responsibility to be true to the source material.
IMHO, at any rate.
I’m all for it if people who *previously* died can have a totally different destiny ;)
But isn’t the purpose of a prequel to tell what happened before the events we all know, to tell how those events came to pass?
It seems to me, JJ wants to have a fresh start. But if so, why use the known characters? Why not create new characters?
I do not have a problem when he updates the look of the ship, the bridge, the uniforms etc. But if he creates a new timeline in which everything we have seen doesn’t happen, then I will be angry.
If JJ wants to do his thing, then he sould have created his own characters, maybe have the story set in the future and not the past.
#88
I have not the faintest idea what you’re talking about… ;)
#22: “Abrams isn’t a trekkie or a trekker, so simple as this will just be Star Trek’s dumbing down and mainstreaming,”
One doesn’t follow from the other.
This may well - and hopefully will - represent a “mainstreaming” of Trek. That said, disinterest in or ignoring of trekkies (or “trekkers”) does not necessarily represent a “dumbing down” of the concept. Trek fans are not smarter, on average, than the “mainstream” audience.
#89-”But isn’t the purpose of a prequel to tell what happened before the events we all know, to tell how those events came to pass?”
See, now you’re thinkin’ too logically. ;)
“It seems to me, JJ wants to have a fresh start. But if so, why use the known characters? Why not create new characters?”
The short answer is marketability. Even still, the idea of an “origin story”, starting out the saga, which has never been done for TOS, can be an effective way of creating that jumping-on point for the general public. Now I’d actually have preferred the whole-new-ship-and-crew approach, myself, but I can completely understand why they’re going back to the TOS characters.
“I do not have a problem when he updates the look of the ship, the bridge, the uniforms etc. But if he creates a new timeline in which everything we have seen doesn’t happen, then I will be angry.”
Right. I agree with this.
Now, I also just had my “D’oh!” moment of the day. We actually know, courtesy of this very site, that at least the TOS regulars all survive, in their younger incarnations. How? Because during their chat here, Zachary Quinto told us that they were filming the final scene of the film, on the bridge, and everybody was there. Zoe Saldana seemed to imply that even Simon Pegg was around someplace, though there seemed to be some confusion about that. And the only other character in the film whose fate is in some way known is Pike.
So unless there’s a whole lot more going on than we know about, I think we can breathe easier on *that* front. ;)
@66 & 78. Yeah. I was joking about The Shat. Just taking a friendly jab at both the Trek “purists” and the Bring-back-the-Shat pack. Should have lol-ed or j.k-ed or something.
Why is it so diffucult for people to understand that this film (and the series from here on out) will take place in an alternate universe?
That does not mean what has gone before will be thrown out. It just means the action will take place in another time frame. Think Mirror universe vs the established universe we have lived in for 40 plus years.
This lets them put their own stamp on the film as well as keep the established universe it tact.
my childhood is being greased and bound for molestation, but strangely, my childhood is ENJOYING it. my childhood turns out to be real trollop, evidently.
the film is going to be great.
#58
Well said! Dammit, Berman and Braga broke the canon rules too many times and too often on only not Enterprise, also other series and movies.
” It won’t suffer from the same problem that traditional prequels suffer from: that you know all the characters will live”
IThat statement also seems to leave the door wide open for Kirk to have a better ending.
Being a diehard Star Trek fan, I am using my wait and see attitude and keeping my minds open until I watch this new movie.
You TOS purists already made hasty judgments WITHOUT WATCHING THE NEW MOVIE! It is extremely unfair to the J.J. and his crew.
I personally am waiting for Bob Orci!
Please … who ever reads this … dont kill Spock.
Let him be lost in some timeline or simply been snapped away or DO SOMETHING, where I can spin my thoughts around and have some little, little form of “hope” without having to cry again.
I don’t want ever again having to cry about Spock. There are so much alternatives.
Don’t kill him again.
You mean (gulp) that “Star Trek” isn’t (gasp) religion???
Canon? What??? again??? Hey, you know history is always written by the victors, but the reality is all too often unrecognizable from what was written in the books. History is almost always revisionist.
“Evil empires” are, more often than not, just words used to rile up the masses, and who is to say that what we have seen in the past TREKs aren’t the historical accounts that have built up the winners’ legacy?
As someone pointed out earlier, TREK’s canon is so tainted that we cannot truly accept anything “as real.”
So what am I saying? To those of you who are so rigidly tied to what you perceive as canon…
Let’s not forget.. it’s just entertainment… Say it with me now.. it’s not real… it’s not real… it’s just a movie… it’s not real (HEY, put down that phaser, buster!!!).
#99
I concur with you.
I hope Bob will clear it up with us.
#84 The fact that Shatner signed on to Generations and Nimoy didn’t, and the reverse is true on the new film, is a good sign. Shat signed on to a turkey and Nimoy’s judgement was vindicated. Nimoy is a thoughtful and careful guardian of ST lore and values. Shat is simply a buffoon who signed on to Generations for $$$$$$.
I trust Nimoy and his judgement. This will be a good film.
Nobody wants to go to another Star Trek funeral.
Make sure that old Spock is alive at the end of this film. And for good measure lets see Shatner one more time to prove Shatner’s version of Kirk is alive and well (even if in an alt timeline)
#103
Uh, didn’t Nimoy kill off Spock in ST II? Was he a “buffoon” for doing that?
Both Harlan Ellison and David Gerrold have said in the past that one problem TREK has had in the past is that it is too static… some characters never change, the Federation always wins, etc…
Later reincarnations have made attempts to recitfy that flaw (Troi and Riker getting married… Riker accepting command of the Titan, for example)… Berman, Braga and company tried to inject new elements into the mythos as well–and in a lot of cases the fans crucified / punished them for it.
Abrams clearly recognizes that if TREK is to regain its place in our culture, it must change, evolve and find appeal in today’s audience–not just those consisting entirely of 1966.
Fun thing about TREK fans is that we ALL have opinions of what should be. I, for one, am looking forward to see how this movie “boldly goes…”
#94-”Why is it so diffucult for people to understand that this film (and the series from here on out) will take place in an alternate universe?
That does not mean what has gone before will be thrown out. It just means the action will take place in another time frame. Think Mirror universe vs the established universe we have lived in for 40 plus years.”
The Mirror Universe episodes did not stop the next episode from continuing in the regular Trekverse. If (and I do say *if*) this new film establishes an alternate continuity, can you say the same about the next film? That’s the difference.
#96 - “Enterprise” had direct canon violations (as contrasted with violations of people’s preconceptions of the 22nd Century) less than three times in four years, a better record than even TNG could boast of.
(But that’s a topic for a whole other thread. ;) )
#103 - To be perfectly fair, Nimoy also said that people’s fears that this film was going to screw up the overall continuity were groundless, too. So we shall see who’s accurate.
#105
You misunderstand. Generations wasn’t a turkey because Kirk was killed - it was a bad movie, period. Kirk dying wasn’t necessarily wrong; it was the storeline around his death and all kinds of other stuff in the movie that was bad.
Spock’s death in TWOK was an integral part of a superb movie and was beautifully, touchingly, and respectfully handled.
Shat has proven his “buffoonery” many times over by his dollar-driven reaction to ST opportunities and by the demeaning and clownish work that he’s done since TOS. In TOS and in his earlier work, he was a serious and talented actor. Now he is a stereotype and a clown.
#10 you are kidding right? Butchered set design and cannon? The movie is not even out yet and it has devasted set design? O h my god! I guess the movie cannot be an entertaining re-imagination of a dying franchise? Gee I guess Battstar Galactica has destroyed set design and cannon to simply get a phenomenal audience and critical review. I better stop watching it because the Galactica command center has buttons in the wrong places!
The most backwards thinking fans I have ever seen. I have beena trek fan my whole life and I am still shocked at the closed mindedness.
#103- Yes. I trust Nimoy’s judgement.
As long as he doesn’t insist on putting whales in it……. or any of his recent photographic subjects… I’m sure the movie will huge, regardless.
The mirror-universe episode of Enterprise in which the TOS-era Defiant was showcased in-detail shows that it’s very possible to take basic TOS design and upgrade it believably and impressively for 21st century audiences. They did a nice job on The Defiant, so there’s every reason to believe that with an even bigger budget, JJ’s Enterprise will be even better (and faithful to TOS).
Canon? Who cares? Abrams is an artist. Artists can do whatever they want when interpreting material. I look forward to this and could care less if a rivet is off center or the Big E looks strange.
Wow! from two simple quotes people have gleamed that this movie is going to bring the end of the world as we know it. I didn’t know so many Star Trek fans are psychic.
While you guys are at it, can you tell me what google’s stock will be worth next month? or who will win the Presidential election this November?
The funny thing is that all those idiots screaming about other re-boots such as BG, James Bond, Batman,etc. all wasted their breath complaining when the product ended up being very good and the old crusty fans simply got trampled under. I hope that happens here when we get a great ’stylish’ updated version of Trek. All of the crusty legions looking for the same bridge and tricorder will crawl back into their safe little holes watching old VHS tapes of ‘The Balance of Terror”!
Out of interest what Canon did Enterprise violate???
(I only watched 5 shows)
None. It just violated a lot of “fanon.”
#114 Totally accurate. On December 26, when the reboot Star Trek is a huge hit; Section 31 and his ilk can creep back into their basements, listen to their 8-track tapes, and watch TOS. Nobody will care about them or their opinions. The vast majority of the ST audience will be watching new-trek and just as importantly, paying for new movies and new TV series’ to be produced.
Enterprise was a good series; but many of the fanatics here would only have been satisfied with toggle switches and pajama uniforms.
#115 loads
First contact with the klingons, temporal cold war, millions of people dying on earth at hands of Xindi that never did in the original timeline, Klingons having “warbirds” as mentioned in the pilot.
ENTERPRISE IS THE SECOND BEST SERIES NEXT TO TOS!!!!!
Did you ever consider that characters and storylines were stiff in later-Trek because pig-headed Trek canonites were ready to pounce and rip to shred any idea that might conflict with something that supposedly took place before?
I mean the Borg and to a lesser extent, the Dominion, worked because the writers could do what they wanted without worrying about canonites killing them and ripping them to shred.
The same stuff is going on now. Star Trek TOS and the movies were some great storytelling. Its time to move on from there, and the best way seems to involve an alternate universe because the present Star Trek universe, based on all these stupid rules and data points, seems closed..thanks to the Roman Canon Church and their leaders, who are upset because their 40 year old Star Trek tech encloypedia may no longer give them the true answers!
T
This writer seems to suck. How could they put a non Trekie super duper geek fan to write a new startrek movie? He just wants to make it acceptible to the masses?
That will not make it popular. Star Trek was and still popular for some reasons, that you cannot alter, and everyone thought it would NOT be popular, but for those very reasons it DID in fact become popular
The more I learn about this movie the more I think they will kill star trek and make an abomination out of it.
Are you all crazy? As has been pointed out, canon violations took place continuously throughout the franchise’s history (people have all kinds of elaborate theories as to how to justify why Scotty thought Kirk was rescuing him in “Relics”, for example–well, turn that creative power into explaining canon mistakes in this movie too). So why is that more important than if the new movie has a good STORY. There have been some wonderful stories on Star Trek, and some really childish ones too (for example, the premise behind how V’Ger got is name has got to be one of the most primitive and silly in all of science fiction). Let’s cool the passions on canon. If the story of the movie sucks, then it won’t matter how badly canon’s been violated, the movie will go down as a bad movie. If the story’s great, canon violations here and there will be unpleasant, but ultimately will matter no more than Klingon ridges did for the thirty or forty years before Enterprise.
Canon is extremely overrated. I am a lover of TOS—first and foremost, but I cannot even begin to count the number of times I noticed a canonical contradiction from one episode to another. Yet, remarkably, TOS gets a pass. Actually, it is not quite so remarkable. No one, in 1966, envisioned that 40+ years later, fans from all over the world might be analyzing it the way we do.
I have seen countless claims that ENT violated canon, but I have yet to see an episode which does so.
I have a difficult time reconciling with a permanently altered timeline, but as someone posted previously, it is not even necessarily permanent. We could see a gigantic story arc which spans a trilogy of films, ending with the original timeline being restored. I have to say that is most intriguing, pure speculation of course, but intriguing to me nonetheless. An entire series of films dedicated to what might have been, yet eventually restoring what was! That has the potential for fantastic storytelling, which is all I require of this bold, new Star Trek.
I was all for this “prequel” telling us stories, within the original timeline, which enable us as fans to fill in the blanks. I have wished for that for years. However, I would be a hypocrite if I dismissed this simply because it is not exactly what I asked for. Who am I to say, before seeing the film, that this is right or wrong. Paramount did not give the franchise to me—they gave it to Mr. Abrams. If he can put Star Trek back on the map of relevancy, good for him.
I wish the new Star Trek team all the success in the world. May Star Trek live long and prosper…
“It won’t suffer from the problem that traditional prequels suffer from: that you know all the characters will live.”
I got a feeling that the movie will bet set in a parallel universe….
Its still canon if JJ Abrams decides to alter the timeline, just because he changes the way things happen doesn’t mean he’s erased the last 40 years, he’s just moving Trek along. if this is to be a brave new world our generation is going to have the hardest time living in it, a Klingon chancellor once said - lets not make it hard by crossing your hands like a child would if he/she didn’t get his/her way.
We can certainly agree that long the way, certain ‘creators’ and ’show runners’ paid little respect to the ‘canon’ established onscreen.
They most definitely ignored, or in some minor cases acknowledged ‘fanon’ to a degree which drives many insane.
They also made simple mistakes. Stuff missed the writers room, slipped passed the producers, and somehow made it to air.
None of these three conditions apply to the movie. Get a grip people. JJ & Crew will mess with you, have fun with you, but will never intentionally screw with your love and affection for Star Trek. Whine, scream, rant and post to your hearts desire - in the end you’ll line up like the rest of us and for some part of the experience - you will smile. Maybe even feel your heart grow two sizes bigger.
This isn’t a ‘Resistance is Futile’ moment. It’s an acknowledgment that the people working on Trek today are skilled craftsmen and women who care about what they do, because honestly if they do a bad job, it hurts them as much as it hurts us. If you didn’t get that from the very unscripted chat, then you need to reread it. The won’t be able to please everyone, because like politics, there are no two types of Star Trek fans. We bicker more than ___add your own political party here____.
So, from one fan to another - peace brothers. In the end, it will work itself out.
David
#108 “In TOS and in his earlier work, he was a serious and talented actor. Now he is a stereotype and a clown. ”
No, Shatner is still a serious and talented actor, who now chooses to play what he at he wants, and whose choices of late have made him more popular than ever and has earned him great recognition from his peers.
Nothing wrong with that.
#119–You are confusing “canon” with “fanon”. Nothing ENT did contradicts previously established canon. Things may not have been the way you imagined them, but that is quite different. Apparently, you had some preconceived notions about the 22nd Century. What took place in ENT IS canon. Are you suggesting that they should never have depicted anything which was not previously mentioned? That is absurd. Many things, some terrible, had to happen before Mr. Roddenberry’s “utopia”(depicted in TOS) was born. ENT tried to show us some of that long road. It is unfortunate that it was constrained by airing on the UPN. I thought it was fantastic–that is, once I was able to see it. Having seen them all, I now consider it among the best of Star Trek, and along with DS9, the best of the spinoffs. I look forward to some homage to it in the new film. I think some did not like it simply because it was different. Of course, it never had the character magic of TOS–but neither did TNG, VOY, or DS9. It stands to me as one of the most underrated series in recent memory.
#119: “First contact with the klingons, temporal cold war, millions of people dying on earth at hands of Xindi that never did in the original timeline, Klingons having “warbirds” as mentioned in the pilot.”
None of that violated “canon.”
It did, however, become canon itself as a result of appearing onscreen. :)
And I don’t get the big “revelation” that this is going to be in an alternate timeline or universe. We’ve known this for a long time now. And so characters die, so what? In an alternate time line, people can die, Kirk can live, all bets are off and that makes for some very fertile ground to plant in.
As far as I’m concerned, this movie is sounding better and better all the time. I say unload all the baggage of the last 20 years and give me a movie that is set in another timeline and is chock full o’ balls-to-the-wall fun and adventure!
Anybody else ever notice that Leonard Nimoy has had a predilection for large mammals since 1986?
Surprised he hasn’t invested in a chain of “fat farms” that are situated on oceanfront property! M’yeah, that would do it! :)
130 - exactly
Before TOS, the timeline was changed, re-writing our futures - nothing to say it didn’t happen or can’t happen so what’s the big hoo-har!
132 Must have come from that mind meld with the whale.
#119 -”#115 loads
“First contact with the klingons” - Never established canonically
” temporal cold war” - Entirely new and therefore no canon to contradict
“millions of people dying on earth at hands of Xindi that never did in the original timeline” - How do you know? Nothing ever said that such a thing couldn’t have happened; it just hadn’t been mentioned previously.
“Klingons having “warbirds” as mentioned in the pilot” - Never established that the word couldn’t apply to Klingon vessel.
Okay, we’re 0 for 4 on alleged violations. ;)
#121 - “Did you ever consider that characters and storylines were stiff in later-Trek because pig-headed Trek canonites were ready to pounce and rip to shred any idea that might conflict with something that supposedly took place before?”
Yup, considered and dismissed the prospect. :D
#123 - “Are you all crazy?”
Well, maybe a little crazy… ;)
“As has been pointed out, canon violations took place continuously throughout the franchise’s history (people have all kinds of elaborate theories as to how to justify why Scotty thought Kirk was rescuing him in “Relics”, for example–well, turn that creative power into explaining canon mistakes in this movie too).”
Sure. In the old days, before folks lost their sense of humor, they used to be called YATIs (for Yet Another Trek Inconsistency), and as you say, we spent lots of time having fun cooking up resolutions to them. But they were usually relatively minor mistakes, or a bit of a tweak so a story could work. And as closettrekker has said, even TOS has its glitches. There was never a deliberate attempt to say, “We are throwing out all previous continuity and starting anew.” To be fair, TPTB haven’t said they’re doing that now, either; in fact, they’ve implied the opposite. But when asked to take that last step from implication to explication, they go silent. And that silence is what raises suspicion.
Let me be clear. I am not either expecting or demanding a slavish devotion to every single detail of a 40-year-old TV series created using filmmaking technologies considered “antique” by today’s standards, and which had to make its own compromises in the context in which it was produced, just to *be* produced. I simply ask that the new material play in the same fictional world, in broad terms, as that in which all the rest of filmed Trek has played, with the same reasonable allowances for variation of detail that we’ve seen all along. I do not believe that is unreasonable to ask.
Old Spock dies in the past…preventing him from saving Kirk in the future. This is the real reason Spock can’t save Kirk and that a Spock saving Kirk can not happen in a future movie.
This is also why Nimoy probably likes the script so much.
I think JJ is hinting more towards a “Butterfly Effect” series of alternate timelines. Nero goes back to attempt to kill off Kirk, but something worse happens each time he does it. He has to keep going back to an earlier time, etc.
We’ve already got clear indication we’ve got the timeframe of the “crew-we-know” on the bridge (that “final” scene), probably the timeframe of the “Pike to Kirk handover”, the timeframe of Kirk taking the Kobayashi Maru, perhaps the timeframe of Kirk in the academy, the timeframe of young Jim and Sam as tweenagers, the timeframe of Kirk’s birth, and perhaps the timeframe of Kirk’s parents meeting.
Sounds like Kill Kirk could be a twist on the classic Kill Hitler sci-fi story where a time traveller’s sent back to kill Hitler, and when the traveller returns, he’s asked why he didn’t kill Mueller like he was supposed to.
In any event, considering Kirk’s parents aren’t indicated as alive during TOS, I think we can guarantee George and Winona Kirk die in this movie. (I think Sarek and Amanda will be okay, though.)
Also, “Green Orion Woman”… probably dies.
Also, Commander Scott (Simon Pegg) probably dies. Good thing his younger brother Lt. Montgomery Scott (Paul McGillion) is around to take his place. (Hmmm, maybe the older Scott’s nickname can be “Welshy”).
Other’n that… any of the cameos could die. Tyler Perry’s Commandant, the “Federation Captain” (hi Tom Cruise!), etc.
Every movie is just a bunch of coincidences that couldn’t happen in real life so whether or not somebody can die really doesn’t matter. And Star Trek has already earned its relevance regardless of this movie’s success or failure. Why don’t they just cease talking and release some cast photos already? They did for STTMP a year early.
Old Spock’s death also ties the movie in with WOK, his other death scene. Plus you get a final bridge shot at the end where everone is sad but movie forward. “Death” makes the movie more “real” and Abrams is shooting for real.
Of course, this is all just guesswork… :o)
#132– “M’yeah, that would do it”
Harry, where are you from?
#133 - Except that the timeline wasn’t changed. We simply learned about things that we hadn’t known about before.
The only thing worse than poor writing is the excuses people come up with to justify it. If Abrams can’t deal with the Trek canon, then he shouldn’t be writing Star Trek.
I think we have all missed the true canon question. in early Trek episodes, you will remember that the Enterprise was powered by lithium, not dilithium. this was quickly changed for obvious reasons. but lithium is still canon!! So as this is a prequel, the ship better be lithium powered!!!
Hey Alex thats fine, because it is already established that messing with the past alters the future. We saw that as far back as Guardian. So J.J. is just using a theory that already has been established in Trek “canon” Its called the big fat reset button, and honestly, if Trek, is going to continue to stay viable for movies and TV scripts, the Enterprise has to be involved in some fashion.
So unless you want to keep going forward in the future, with Captain >>>>> of the Enterprise Z, the reset button is being pushed. Of course its not a full reset, as Trek is ok with parallel universes, and “Yesterday’s Enterprise” and “Parallels” are considered some of Trek’s greatest achievements.
Of course, the Alien Nazis wasn’t so hot, so counterpoint.
Anyone watch the Terminator : Sarah Connor Chronicles? Totally zapped the timeline and you know what? Who cares! Maybe JJ is going to make Trek his own and that is fine and dandy with me. If you feel that its changing the way trek was, then just watch/read old trek. I, for one, am game for anything new and intesting.
#140″Harry, where are you from?”
Assuming that’s not a metaphysical question, I “hang my hat” in Toronto.
Yeah- referring way back to #17- WHY DOES EVERYONE GET ALL TWISTED UP ABOUT DESIGN WHEN THERE WAS NOOOOO CONSISTENCY IN THE FIRST SIX FILMS???
I’ll repeat what I said in a previous post floating around this site:
Canon, schmanon. All I really want is for someone to tell me a good story. That fact hasn’t changed since I was three years old, and it ain’t changin’ anytime soon.
Being familiar with a *lot* of JJ’s work (I’ve watched almost every series he produced), I have a lot of confidence in him and his team to give us a good story. To quote Nimoy: “Let them make their movie.”
Y’all wait and see. It’s going to be good.
#130: Thank you! ST: Enterprise is highly underrated.
Peace. Live long and prosper.
The Vulcanista }:-|
#142–You seem to forget what was said in live chat.
I believe I can paraphrase it this way—-
Anything which appears to violate established canon will have a canon-inspired explanation.
I believe it was Mr. Orci who said that. How can you know this to be false if you have yet to see the film?
#143
Why settle for one lithium when you can have two?
#97: “That statement also seems to leave the door wide open for Kirk to have a better ending.”
Funny, that’s the way I took it. It’s like the Star Wars prequels . . . as much as I love Ewan McGregor’s Obi-Wan, you KNEW he wasn’t in any real danger, because he has to become Alec Guiness. Likewise, it would really suck knowing that young Kirk will cheat death again and again, only to fall off a bridge as William Shatner. If JJ & company can remove that reality somehow, I’m all for it. We don’t even need Shatner to appear for that to happen.
Jeez, what hysteria from two simple sentences. Thank God for the occasional islands of rational thought. Let’s trust Leonard Nimoy’s judgment for now — we need Trek to be a hit again.
>>Rick Berman, though I’m sure it wasn’t his conscious intent, drove the franchise into the ground, both on television and in film.
AMEN to that! He may not have meant to, but he milked the TrekCow to the point of dessication.
Now, this movie will happen, whether or not any one of James T. Kirk’s 17 violations of the Temporal Prime Directive have changed history or not.
Speaking of time travel, maybe Spock has a little help from the Temporal Police in his voyages? Just a thought.
And whatever became of Porthos?
#152
Porthos was fed to a Targ
#143: Didn’t you hear the apostrophe? When you heard lithium, what was on the page was ‘lithium, which is a contracted form of dilithium. That YATI was solved ages ago. When trilithium was concocted, it became necessary to stop abbreviating dilithium.
#143… they’ve secretly replaced the ship’s lithium crystals with Folger’s Dilithium Crystals. Let’s see if anyone notices…
132 - I find what you posted to be offensive and a little out of line there.
I’ve been thinking all along this might be an alternate-universe scenario. It would certainly free Abrams & Co to do whatever the flip they want, and then revert to canoniverse at movie’s end.
My guess is the film will be based mostly in the main Trek universe but will incorporate jumps into an alternate dimension. . . maybe even an island in the South Pacific. . . a really weird island. . . with polar bears.
Starting from scratch. Making every step of the classic Enterprise a *new* step. You know, as long as the vision is faithful to the original roddenberrian themes of exploration, discovery and optimism, I am for it !
I’m not even going to bother reading the above posts as they have already started with the “Not canon! Not canon!!” freakouts. Time to put canon away and get your popcorn out and enjoy the show. Or stay home and let us have some fun. Gee whiz some of you people can be spoil sports. I’m starting to hope that they change everything drastically just to give the canon worshippers fainting spells.
OK, I lied. I did read your comment Vulcanista. And yours Closettrekker. Because they were right above mine while I was typing. I agree and concur. Pass the popcorn, please.
I have a pretty open mind abou this movie. I’m excited for it. I really believe Mr. Nimoy would not have anything to do with it if he felt it was anything other than Star Trek. Let’s give it a chance. Someone said that since J.J. wasn’t an avid fan of Trek, this movie will suffer. That Logan fellow that wrote Nemisis was a HUGE Trek fan and A lot of people thought that movie suffered-a lot. I liked it, I like to watch Trek for the sure pleasure of watching a movie and not exploring all the cryptic meaning behind a story.
#154
That explanation is SO cute, I’m half-tempted to feed you to a Mugatu! :)
#156
And here I thought fat people were supposed to be jolly!
I personally do not care about canon violations. But I do worry about Abrams and the screenplayers (while Transformers was enjoyable I wouldn’t call it a good screenplay). All this PR is pointless, without real details it’s not worth it to discuss much.
Section 31 - February 5, 2008
This is PROOF that this movie is not loyal to canon!
A: NO IT DOESN’T.
13. Iowagirl - February 5, 2008
This film will be fatal.
A: IOWAGIRL,
You’ve been so positive and supportive before. Why the change of heart?
Just to clarify the above statement, Abrams does the kind of shows I’m mostly skeptical about (Lost and Cloverfield for example).
Would anyone consider TNG episode “Tapestry” a prequel?
If the timelime is reset , be careful what you wish for. They may just keep bringing back old characters in new ways; Khan again but younger and buffer; a Romulan commander who falls for Kirk this time; a bigger Doomsday Machine, et. al. Rehash redux until they reset again. It ’s eaier than getting writers who wrote for TOS like Jerome Bixby (also penned fantastic voyage with Otto Klement-short story) or Robert Bloch (psycho) to make up new stuff. And knocking off Spock might not make this like another prequel, but it would make it just like a little movie called TWOK a quarter century ago.
Hi Bob
Still cold?
so can you tell us who is playing Ensign Ricky?
#165 Maybe you’re skeptical about Lost and Cloverfield, but thankfully the majority of the public likes them. If JJ pulls off a Lost or Cloverfield with the new Star Trek movie, then we should all kneel down and praise him because he will have saved the ST franchise.
82. Jim - February 5, 2008
There was a time (pre-internet days, for all readers under 15), when fans had to seek out information about new movies from obscure print sources. Anyone out there remember fanzines, or Jim Steranko’s “Mediascene” or other like publications produced by folks who clearly loved the genres upon which they were reporting? Because of that, the way in which movies were released and promoted was much different (for the better, IMHO).
Creative types actually seemed to care about attracting a passionate fan base by releasing meaningful information rather than running around saying “trust us - we make good movie”. For example, several months prior to the release of “Star Wars” (and no I ain’t doing the renumbered chapters foolishness), Lucas had not only released a lot of Ralph McQuarrie’s pre-production art but a complete novelization of the movie.
It is sounding almost as though this film will be one for the “it blowed up real good” crowd than for those who found ST more challenging (and thus, more entertaining) over the years because it seemed to resist pandering to the lowest common denominator. If this is the creative team’s idea of “viral marketing”, it sure has backfired for me. After a brief period of cautious optimism, these recent comments have driven me to a point where I could care less about what’s up with this new film.
A: Marketing and making a movie are two entirely different endeavors. I would implore you not to base your opinion of one based on the other, particularly when it has been our intention to not have ANYTHING be known about this movie until much later — we are forced into revealing details of your surprise party because thanks to the internet, fans don’t like surprises. Our trade off, however, has been to be as open as possible about the process and the thinking behind our decisions.
Although I have to come to be suspicious of the phrase LEAST COMMON DENOMINATOR as a unintentional code word of the elite, let me just say that the story of this movie IS NOT targeting the least common denominator.
I think The Shat’s Star Trek novels should be canon. IMO Shatner is carrier of the canon torch. He revived Kirk in the most logical & cinematic way & his vision would have made ST XI the biggest hit since Titanic.
Star Trek is about warping forward, not re-imaginating the past.
Also, for some prespective, was anyone around during the production days of TWoK?
Do you remember all the hoopla and rumors surrounding the death of Spock, how outraged the fans were, complaints about Roddenberry being marginalized for the production, how no one was going to see this movie, that this was going to be the proverbial “final nail in the coffin” for Star Trek?
I know 1982 was a lifetime ago. But as I remember, the movie was OK.
:)
#169
Doesn’t change that objectively they may have flaws, success or not. I honestly find Abrams irritating with this “I speak but I don’t speak” attitude. Release some real information when the time comes or just don’t talk at all. I could care less of his PR spins (all he said so far, basically).
89. Admiral_Bumblebee - February 5, 2008
But isn’t the purpose of a prequel to tell what happened before the events we all know, to tell how those events came to pass?
It seems to me, JJ wants to have a fresh start. But if so, why use the known characters? Why not create new characters?
I do not have a problem when he updates the look of the ship, the bridge, the uniforms etc. But if he creates a new timeline in which everything we have seen doesn’t happen, then I will be angry.
If JJ wants to do his thing, then he sould have created his own characters, maybe have the story set in the future and not the past.
A: JJ had no intention of directing Trek at all. But we knew if we could get an A-lister non-”AVID”-fan like him to do it, with a TOS script that still satisfied our geek impulses and that still maintained original characters, then we would really have a shot at making this work.
Jay - “The Real Jim Kirk” - February 5, 2008
I personally am waiting for Bob Orci!
A: (SINGS to the tune of Mighty Mouse) Here I come to confuse the day!
Death can often mean a new beginning…?
Bob Orci
quick question….where did you live when you were growing up in Toronto? My being a lifetime Torontonian makes me curious!
I too lived in Toronto for decades.
Hey Bob - did you ever see 2001 A Space Odyssey at the Glendale Theatre on Avenue Road? That was true nirvana for the scfi fan!
Shatner4TrekXI - February 5, 2008
The only thing worse than poor writing is the excuses people come up with to justify it. If Abrams can’t deal with the Trek canon, then he shouldn’t be writing Star Trek.
A: Hi. My name is Roberto Orci and my writing partner’s name is Alex Kurtzman. We are thrilled to have JJ Abrams directing Star Trek
Canon sucks… get over it.
162 - I’m not fat or overweight, I just find what you wrote to be out of line.
171 - “He revived Kirk in the most logical & cinematic way & his vision would have made ST XI the biggest hit since Titanic.”
I just did a spit take on that one. Sybok, I could read your stuff for hours…
#144 - “Hey Alex thats fine, because it is already established that messing with the past alters the future.”
Sure, but the citations for alleged canon violations in ENT so far (which have all been disproven) weren’t instances of the timeline being altered…unless one assumes that the universe around one alters every time one learns a new bit of history. I suppose it *could*, but that’s a bit too solipsistic for me. ;)
“We saw that as far back as Guardian. So J.J. is just using a theory that already has been established in Trek “canon” Its called the big fat reset button,”
And if JJ resets all his alternate universes into the baseline Trekverse by the end of the film, I’m cool with that.
“and honestly, if Trek, is going to continue to stay viable for movies and TV scripts, the Enterprise has to be involved in some fashion.”
I don’t know that that’s true at all, really. Trek got a few hundred episodes out of the counter-argument.
“Of course, the Alien Nazis wasn’t so hot, so counterpoint.”
Oh, I agree re those episodes. I’m not making any statements about relative quality, since that’s way too subjective. Trek’s always had good and bad episodes, in every series. That’s not an argument for chucking continuity, though.
#147 - The answer there, of course, is that they were progressing forward in time, and any changes were just that: changes. They didn’t suggest that what had come before didn’t happen; they merely suggested that the ship had undergone modification. Happens all the time in reality, even.
#151 - ” It’s like the Star Wars prequels . . . as much as I love Ewan McGregor’s Obi-Wan, you KNEW he wasn’t in any real danger, because he has to become Alec Guiness. ”
Didn’t matter to me. I didn’t need to have to artificially worry about the character. I wanted to know how the story played out.
#164 - Hi, Bob! I can’t speak for Iowagirl, but for me, the evolution in perception has been from the original press release, which told us that the film was respecting and embracing continuity, to now, when it seems like every other comment sounds like a dodge to get out of continuity. (The result is that I’ve gone from super-enthusiastic about this film to wary and uncomfortable and really hoping for something to bring me back to that super-enthusiastic state. :) ) Now, I’ll freely grant you, there’s a whole lot about the film I don’t know, and it might not be hard to bring me back to the really happy side of the fence, but I gotta hear/see it.
Either way, thanks for still reading!
177
North York.
I’m in Toronto right now.
Here’s my theory:
I believe Nero will at some point kill of young Kirk, and in which case creates an alternate timeline. Old Spock at some point realizes that something is not right and decides to go back to several points in time to figure out when Kirk was killed. He eventually saves Kirk and everything returns to normal. Thats my theory.
nthony Pascale - February 5, 2008
Hi Bob
Still cold?
so can you tell us who is playing Ensign Ricky?
A: Warm in my hotel right now, but looking forward to freezing my face off later during an all-night shoot.
Ensign Ricky will be played by Peter O’Toole.
hmmmmmmm - maybe ST-XI is filming in the wilds of the Metro Zoo?
185 Freddie Wise - February 5, 2008
Here’s my theory:
I believe Nero will at some point kill of young Kirk, and in which case creates an alternate timeline. Old Spock at some point realizes that something is not right and decides to go back to several points in time to figure out when Kirk was killed. He eventually saves Kirk and everything returns to normal. Thats my theory.
A: It’s a good theory in that it fits into two categories
1) Is in line with available observable evidence
2) It is scientifically testable (next X-Mas).
Of course, the earth being the center of the Universe was also a good theory once :)
#183 “…the really happy side of the fence…”
It’s fun over here! There’s booze and good food and music and dancing…
Peace. Live long and prosper.
The Vulcanista }:-|
Thanks for taking the time to comment Mr. Orci.
I dug out my TOS dvds and have been watching them in anticipation. I love the old series and yes I love the canon stuff, even though TOS and all Trek really has serious canon problems. If your movie isn’t perfect to the letter canon so be it.
So I wanted to say I like what I hear so far and I hope the flick put some serious cash in your pockets.
But I have a major, important, stupendous question. Will we see miniskirts? For the love of God please tell me!!!!!
Kidding, you don’t have to. I know you have to save some important stuff for the opening night of the flick;)
#186
Re night shoot: Have you tried foot warmers that backpackers and campers use? They’re fantastic, and you can get them anywhere they sell sporting goods. They’ve got them for gloves too.
Peace. Live long and prosper.
The Vulcanista }:-|
190. Ahkenatan - February 5, 2008
But I have a major, important, stupendous question. Will we see miniskirts? For the love of God please tell me!!!!!
A: You will have an answer about what everyone is wearing very soon.
OK, Harry, you have your assignment. Find Roberto and get on that set. We want details, info, and stuff to argue about. Although of the latter, we are not in short supply.
Roberto, please let Harry on the set. You will recognize him from two distinguishing characteristics.
# 170
Mr. Orci
Yes sir, I do remember those days. I remember back in the 60’s the main source of entertainment news for me was TV Guide. It hit the stands every Tuesday. I used to scour the neighborhood to find 4 empty coke bottles so I can return them for their 4 cent deposit so I could afford the 15 cent cover price for TV Guide.
TV Guide generally had a few feature articles, but I most liked the little “news tidbits” in the front section. Terse statements like “ABC to unveil Movie of the Week series”, “Dick York Leaves Bewitched” and, of course, “Star Trek Cancelled”.
I still have a lot of those old issues - including some of the ones featuring ST covers.
Now it’s basically information overload. And because of the huge demand for information - the pressure is on to come up with something. As a result we gets LOTS of rumours and outright falsities to wade through.
Thanks for you regular clarifications.
Roberto,
I think that I have been supportive of you in our talks here too, but I too am starting to get a little concerned. But I will say I can only imagine the pressure that you and Alex had, considering that this franchise was basically dead.
#164
Hi Roberto, great to have you with us again.
Although I think you mistake me for somebody else, I very much appreciate your concern.
I have been very bothered about STXI from the beginning because I doubt that the original vision of TOS will